My son downloaded a stupid game the first dat he had it because he thought it was free and we found out last month that we have been charged for it for a year. Screw that! sorry dude, but your son bamboozled you, and you fell for it. the 'get it now' apps are VERY clear that they cost money- in fact, that's the FIRST thing you see when you select one of them.:P
Why are these investigations even needed? to protect sensitive (not just classified or dod) information
I mean, will he be fired, for example, if Joe Scientist is gay? being gay isn't considered a security risk- being in the closet or lying about it IS considered a security risk (potential blackmail threat).
Libertarian? Doesn't read the bible? Anti-bush? Anti-war? Prefers german Cars? Doesn't believe in Santa Claus? Prefers Pepsi? Etc. nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, and nope.
While I will admit it is tough to not buy products made in China, I have found that with the exception of sunglasses and most electronics, I can buy the products I need which aren't made in China. you weren't looking too hard, eh? Luxottica (Italian) is one of the largest (maybe IS the largest?) sunglasses company in the world, w/ it's own brands (luxottica, ray ban, soon oakley) and outsources to many others(versace, prada, d&g, etc), and does most of their production in italy (oakley's mostly made in us).
In this case the first person she talked to should have looked at the device and seen that it was A: in their opinion a threat, or B: in their opinion a possible min understanding waiting to happen. If the former, alert security and have an officer take a closer look. that seems like more or less what happened- someone asked her about it, but she ignored them and walked away. this raised a LOT more suspicion, so they escalated their response to determine the threat level.
dude, this is a bunch of crap- i have office 2007, and it respects old formats. it won't write over it w/ the newer format unless you specifically tell it to.
That's where "sane" operating systems differ. User space and the OS are heavily separated, in fact, user space for each user is separated from other users, and almost all services run as a unique user. This intentional separation provides very robust security, and is absolutely necessary to creating a secure system.
I cannot blame anyone but MS for this... and not the MS Word or Office team. If the OS were properly designed so that user space applications were properly separated, issues such as this would not exist. this has nothing to do with separation of the user space- the app is run as a unique user, and the information stolen is that available to that user. there is no suggestion that privilege escalation occured in this attack.
slashdot crowd's supposed to be informed techies, and this gets modded insightful? he's wrong on all counts- office has had the same format from 97-2003.
Remember the Tennessee Valley Authority from your history class? Why was it important?
it's important because it shows what a bad idea having gov't run lun large projects is? the tva is essentially a $6B corporation carrying $29B in debt, subsidized by 250M people, so that 15M people can have chearper than normal electricity.
yeah, sounds like a real winner to me. not.
wordperfect was not a good product that failed due to bad marketing- it was a good product that failed to keep up with the market, and became a bad product...
yes, it's just you, as the msnbc title is much more accurate- the contract is for a capsule to get to the moon, not the actual lunar lander, nevermind a mars lander!
lockheed is also part of united space alliance (lockheed and boeing are the two major players), and both the teams have major presences in the major population states.
The cell phone "deals" are a double-dip scam. If what you say is true, that the contract is to subsidize the phone, then you are contractually obligated to stay with them for the duration.
However, the phones are also *provider-locked*, which means you can't go elsewhere with it anyway.
incorrect. it depends on the carrier- t-mobile will unlock your phone after 90 days, and cingular will unlock it when your contract is done. i've done it with both. and if you don't want to / can't get your carrier to unlock the phone, there are a whole bunch of places that will do it for $10.
Also, you cannot go to a provider with a phone you already own that is locked to their network (from a previous contract, obtained secondhand, etc.) and get month-to-month service without a contract, despite NOT having to subsidize your phone. They simply refuse.
again, incorrect. when my dad was visiting from asia with his phone we had him on a month-month with at&t, and i currently have verizon on a month-month with a phone that i got from someone else.
The iPod gets its cache by being associated with other enlightened Apple solutions. Spin it off and the magic is gone
uhh, i think you've got it back-asswords; apple's recent resurgence is largely due to the ipod, which is the hip, gotta have toy. if anything, it's the 'other enlightened apple solutions' GAIN cachet from the ipod.
Yeah, requirements.....those are a real bumber. Imagine that...you have to have a consistent process to develop something very complicated.
yeah, that's the thing- most of the things that engineers are going to knock out aren't that complicated programatically. and yes, requirements CAN be a real bummer when you have to essentially spell it out line by line to someone because they just don't get the basic concepts.
Most people with a CS degree should have more than enough understanding of Physics and Mathematics that they should be able to interpret what you're doing. Couple that with the fact that once they've been in your system a bit and understand the lingo and systems, they can really start to flow.
yeah, not so much. it's not that you have to explain the physics to them, you have to do crap like give them all the equations you need to solve a problem, etc. the math is simple enough to dump into code, so it's easier and quicker to to tell an engineer that you need a code to solve for the pressure distribution on the upper surface of a wing given basic geometry, mach, and alpha then to explain to a cs major all the equations and how to use them. by the time you get it all down, you couldda typed up half the equations into the program yourself. and the cs major isn't gonna have any idea what to poke and tweak to see if his code is robust.
It's quicker right now....maybe. It's easier right now...maybe. It's cheaper right now...maybe. Things have a tendency to catch up when you don't actually know what you're doing.
no maybes, it's quicker, easier, cheaper. and you don't have someone who doesn't know what they're doing do it- they LEARN (once) how to do the basic coding, then they do it. engineering equations are easy to program.
I could design a rocket to go anywhere.
you could design one, but it probably wouldn't actually go anywhere. if i have an engineer program something, it's going to run; the code may not be as pretty, but it'll do the job, and likely alot better than one done by a cs major that i hand specs to, because as the engineer codes the program up, he'll draw on his past experiences about how engineers really work and incorporate that into the program. that's the big difference.
and that's not just how we work in-house. that's how a LOT of the commercial software houses that develop engineering software do- they have cs guys to be sure, but they also have a lot of engineers that have some programming background, or have learned on the job. i PERSONALLY know this is the case at altair, dassault, msc, and ptc.
1 and 2- if i had an engineer working with / for me that couldn't learn to be a passable programmer, i'd not want them to work with / for me. programming (at the level most engineers would be doing it- we're not talking huge codes here (typically)) mostly involves relatively simple math and control structures that any vaguely competant engineer should be able to pick up quickly.
3- engineering time is typically cheaper than (good) programmers' time. not to mention the engineer would still have to spend time writing specs and working w/ the programmer to tell them what to do. we've been in this situation many times, and it's much better / quicker / cheaper to get a engineer w/ passable programming abilities to do the coding for you. for many engineering problems, the coding is often relatively trivial compared to the engineering knowledge required. it's easier to get an engineer up to a passable level of programming skill than it is to get a programmer up to a passable level of engineering knowledge where not every single thing needs to be spelled out to them ('cause at that point it's cheaper to do it yourself anyways rather than produce such a detailed spec(costing you time and money) THEN pay the programmer).
and getting that engineer the programming knowledge is more or less a one-time investment, whereas producing detailed specs is something that needs to be done everytime for a programmer.
pffffftttt... i'm actually an AE that does a lot of coding as well, and we've tried it that way. you need to write *ridiculously* detailed specs on everything for a non-engineer to understand the problem your trying to solve and get it right. it's quicker, easier, and cheaper to do it ourselves.
1- the d-21 was VERY cool
2- it's 40 years old, so it's a little unfair to compare to modern day uavs
3- it did a lot of things that other operations uavs still can't do today
4- it was hardly lockheed's last uav. if you'd read the article, you'd see they have some currently operational in iraq
If neither Mr. Gates nor Mr. Belfiore can figure out how Front Row could have TV and digital video recorder functions without adding buttons to Apple's remote, Microsoft is in sorry shape.
it COULD have tv functions w/out adding buttons, but it wouldn't be nearly as useful. entering channels, for example, is much easier w/ direct access buttons.
Re:H1B is the new age slavetrade. Shame on the US.
on
The H-1B Swindle
·
· Score: 1
H1B is truly the new age slavetrade.
please, that kind of rhetoric isn't going to buy you any supporters. $73k, even in overpriced california, is hardly chump change, and a far cry from slavery.
Slashdot Mirror
no, it's not hard to say; this had nothing to do with at&t- they've long allowed 3rd party apps across a wide range of their phones.
dude, this is a bunch of crap- i have office 2007, and it respects old formats. it won't write over it w/ the newer format unless you specifically tell it to.
well, for one, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are two different things. :D
slashdot crowd's supposed to be informed techies, and this gets modded insightful? he's wrong on all counts- office has had the same format from 97-2003.
Remember the Tennessee Valley Authority from your history class? Why was it important?
it's important because it shows what a bad idea having gov't run lun large projects is? the tva is essentially a $6B corporation carrying $29B in debt, subsidized by 250M people, so that 15M people can have chearper than normal electricity. yeah, sounds like a real winner to me. not.
test
sony's got a little gps receiver (gps-cs1) that will do that, by matching time stamps w/ your photos.
wordperfect was not a good product that failed due to bad marketing- it was a good product that failed to keep up with the market, and became a bad product...
yes, it's just you, as the msnbc title is much more accurate- the contract is for a capsule to get to the moon, not the actual lunar lander, nevermind a mars lander!
lockheed is also part of united space alliance (lockheed and boeing are the two major players), and both the teams have major presences in the major population states.
The cell phone "deals" are a double-dip scam. If what you say is true, that the contract is to subsidize the phone, then you are contractually obligated to stay with them for the duration. However, the phones are also *provider-locked*, which means you can't go elsewhere with it anyway.
incorrect. it depends on the carrier- t-mobile will unlock your phone after 90 days, and cingular will unlock it when your contract is done. i've done it with both. and if you don't want to / can't get your carrier to unlock the phone, there are a whole bunch of places that will do it for $10.
Also, you cannot go to a provider with a phone you already own that is locked to their network (from a previous contract, obtained secondhand, etc.) and get month-to-month service without a contract, despite NOT having to subsidize your phone. They simply refuse.
again, incorrect. when my dad was visiting from asia with his phone we had him on a month-month with at&t, and i currently have verizon on a month-month with a phone that i got from someone else.
The iPod gets its cache by being associated with other enlightened Apple solutions. Spin it off and the magic is gone
uhh, i think you've got it back-asswords; apple's recent resurgence is largely due to the ipod, which is the hip, gotta have toy. if anything, it's the 'other enlightened apple solutions' GAIN cachet from the ipod.
Yeah, requirements.....those are a real bumber. Imagine that...you have to have a consistent process to develop something very complicated.
yeah, that's the thing- most of the things that engineers are going to knock out aren't that complicated programatically. and yes, requirements CAN be a real bummer when you have to essentially spell it out line by line to someone because they just don't get the basic concepts.
Most people with a CS degree should have more than enough understanding of Physics and Mathematics that they should be able to interpret what you're doing. Couple that with the fact that once they've been in your system a bit and understand the lingo and systems, they can really start to flow.
yeah, not so much. it's not that you have to explain the physics to them, you have to do crap like give them all the equations you need to solve a problem, etc. the math is simple enough to dump into code, so it's easier and quicker to to tell an engineer that you need a code to solve for the pressure distribution on the upper surface of a wing given basic geometry, mach, and alpha then to explain to a cs major all the equations and how to use them. by the time you get it all down, you couldda typed up half the equations into the program yourself. and the cs major isn't gonna have any idea what to poke and tweak to see if his code is robust.
It's quicker right now....maybe. It's easier right now...maybe. It's cheaper right now...maybe. Things have a tendency to catch up when you don't actually know what you're doing.
no maybes, it's quicker, easier, cheaper. and you don't have someone who doesn't know what they're doing do it- they LEARN (once) how to do the basic coding, then they do it. engineering equations are easy to program.
I could design a rocket to go anywhere.
you could design one, but it probably wouldn't actually go anywhere. if i have an engineer program something, it's going to run; the code may not be as pretty, but it'll do the job, and likely alot better than one done by a cs major that i hand specs to, because as the engineer codes the program up, he'll draw on his past experiences about how engineers really work and incorporate that into the program. that's the big difference.
and that's not just how we work in-house. that's how a LOT of the commercial software houses that develop engineering software do- they have cs guys to be sure, but they also have a lot of engineers that have some programming background, or have learned on the job. i PERSONALLY know this is the case at altair, dassault, msc, and ptc.
1 and 2- if i had an engineer working with / for me that couldn't learn to be a passable programmer, i'd not want them to work with / for me. programming (at the level most engineers would be doing it- we're not talking huge codes here (typically)) mostly involves relatively simple math and control structures that any vaguely competant engineer should be able to pick up quickly. 3- engineering time is typically cheaper than (good) programmers' time. not to mention the engineer would still have to spend time writing specs and working w/ the programmer to tell them what to do. we've been in this situation many times, and it's much better / quicker / cheaper to get a engineer w/ passable programming abilities to do the coding for you. for many engineering problems, the coding is often relatively trivial compared to the engineering knowledge required. it's easier to get an engineer up to a passable level of programming skill than it is to get a programmer up to a passable level of engineering knowledge where not every single thing needs to be spelled out to them ('cause at that point it's cheaper to do it yourself anyways rather than produce such a detailed spec(costing you time and money) THEN pay the programmer). and getting that engineer the programming knowledge is more or less a one-time investment, whereas producing detailed specs is something that needs to be done everytime for a programmer.
pffffftttt... i'm actually an AE that does a lot of coding as well, and we've tried it that way. you need to write *ridiculously* detailed specs on everything for a non-engineer to understand the problem your trying to solve and get it right. it's quicker, easier, and cheaper to do it ourselves.
1- the d-21 was VERY cool
2- it's 40 years old, so it's a little unfair to compare to modern day uavs
3- it did a lot of things that other operations uavs still can't do today
4- it was hardly lockheed's last uav. if you'd read the article, you'd see they have some currently operational in iraq
If neither Mr. Gates nor Mr. Belfiore can figure out how Front Row could have TV and digital video recorder functions without adding buttons to Apple's remote, Microsoft is in sorry shape.
it COULD have tv functions w/out adding buttons, but it wouldn't be nearly as useful. entering channels, for example, is much easier w/ direct access buttons.
H1B is truly the new age slavetrade.
please, that kind of rhetoric isn't going to buy you any supporters. $73k, even in overpriced california, is hardly chump change, and a far cry from slavery.